[drpix]

Ethics is not an "angle". The ethics of a SLIMEBALL CHEAT is not changed by "who won".

As stated in my earlier and other's postings the Bush campaign has no say in what anti-Kerry people "push". ( Check Swiftvet issue and forged TANG memo history.)

And if you're going to be a conservative or even a true independent, stop reasoning like a liberal!
Principles decide...not appearances and tactics! Character DOES matter...and who is a better debater is insignificant in comparison!

[Iwo Jima]

So true. Kerry's obvious cheating is a distinctly separate issue from who won or lost the debate. Cheaters need to be exposed even if they're losers. It just adds insult to injury if through their cheating they beat someone who was on the level.

[Area51]

And if you're going to be a conservative or even a true independent, stop reasoning like a liberal!
Principles decide...not appearances and tactics! Character DOES matter...and who is a better debater is insignificant in comparison!


1,201 posted on 10/04/2004 6:11:08 AM PDT by drpix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 992 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

---

Got news for you, what you and I think in imaterial in this election. We decide and cast our ballots. The masses are another thing all together.

Slick Willy was elected and re-elected because a large portion of Amercan women thought he was attractive. JFK was the same.

Kerry is slick. His attack was impressive if one didn't know that he was lieing thru his teeth. But most voters don't investigate enough to find that out. Bush was terrible at pointing it out. He let way to many attacks go without responding.

So being a better debater does make a difference. Bush better bring his A game next time out of the box or he may very well be a one term President.

[Destro]

It is called rhetoric - it is a tool to figure out if your argument can hold water. I posted a rhetorical point.